On Thu, 2019-01-10 at 16:28 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 01:29:54PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > +static bool inside_selftest(void)
> > +{
> > + return current == lockdep_selftest_task_struct;
> > +}
> > +void lockdep_free_key_range(void *start, unsigned long size)
> > +{
> > + init_data_structures_once();
> > +
> > + if (inside_selftest())
> > + lockdep_free_key_range_imm(start, size);
> > + else
> > + lockdep_free_key_range_reg(start, size);
> > }
>
> That is .... unfortunate. The whole reason that whole immediate thing
> works at all is because there is no concurrency what so ever that early,
> right?
>
> Should we maybe key off of: 'system_state == SYSTEM_BOOTING' instead?
Hi Peter,
I agree that it is unfortunate that the selftests require a different code
path. I have not been able to find any way to avoid this. Using the test
system_state == SYSTEM_BOOTING should work and will allow to remove the
lockdep_selftest_task_struct variable. Do you want me to make that change?
Bart.
